Comments on: Measuring Success in Afghanistan

By: lucasengine

lucasengine — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 01:01:13 +0000

I’d say before the Governement or DOD/DND Contractors stop manufacturing aussies plane or aircraft they should think about how much space are being save before taking off the run-way.
Even in a regular cruiseship they can land and take off that kind of aircraft.

Reporting Redoctober41

By: IKE

IKE — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 17:39:57 +0000

I really wish that the expertise supplied to targeting the US populace for votes was applied towards Afghan. The combined effort of statisticians, pollsters, and campaign strategists let the candidate know the exact words to get the exact response in precise counties in order to win a state and thus the electoral votes and thus the election. If only they applied as much effort to understanding what the Afghan people really need/want and worked on targetting those needs and wants.
As Penn stated, you need to know your endgame to establish a path forward. Once you have a path your metrics will follow.

By: pennst98

pennst98 — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 20:27:15 +0000

You cannot have metrics until you decide your end state, then work a strategy to get there. Your metrics should mirror or align to the strategy. (troops trained, territory controlled, etc)

Unfortunately “metrics” in this discussion means propaganda. If you want to argue we’re losing simply quote the number of KIA , wounded, and civilian deaths. If you want to argue we’re winning cite the number of completed missions, insurgents killed, etc. In the end its all propaganda, for the true metric is who is viewed as legitimate and who the enemy is.

By: Jeff

Jeff — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 14:40:48 +0000

I would comment but being retired Infantry and a PhD now in Database Research and a "wargamer" of 35 years by HOBBY; these people doing METRICS don't know their ARSE from a HOLE IN THE GROUND; nor have they walked EVER with the FIELD PACKS these GUYS are carrying in the terrain they are fighting in. History will judge this as a BRUSH FIRE WAR; a LITTLE WAR like "Panama" the "Phillipines" and Viet Nam. I say that because even now in hind sight NAM is nothing but a trip to WAL MART. The WALL FELL; it was all for NOTHING. In the end the "VAUNTED METRICS OF AFGHANISTAN" won't compare to the 10,000 dead in ONE DAY 1841, Jellabad the British SUFFERED then they went in and KILLED MORE THAN THAT? Now; with computers, and robots; we jerk around the guys in a BUNKER and TALK OF METRICS to GET THEM OUT>? THE CAVE MAN WAZIRI WILL STILL BE THERE ABUSING HIS WOMAN WHEN WE ARE GONE.

By: roland

roland — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 12:22:26 +0000

Just drop them (Terrorist) some leflets to surrender or face the consquesces. –Problem solved.

With 100,000 troops and 1000 planes. I think we can do that.

By: Drake1

Drake1 — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 17:42:27 +0000

The Administration’s own metrics seem to take more things into consideration than the GAO, like the“percent of the population living [in Afghanistan] in districts/areas under insurgent control”, “public perception at the district level of the Afghan Government’s effectiveness and sustained ability to provide services” , etcetera.

The AfPak Channel has an article titled, “What the White House’s AfPak metrics list doesn’t say” which goes over these and other benchmarks in the Administration’s metrics.

http://afpak.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/09/16/w...